Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: 10-8 Performance Rear Sight & Ameriglo ProGlo Front Sight

  1. #11
    Site Supporter Eli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Attalla, Alabama.
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthernHeat View Post
    I know I needed the .156 10-8 Performance rear sight, but didn't know there was different heights of the ProGlo.
    Ok so the .156 10-8 rear and .220 tall ProGlo work best?

    That's what my 17 and 19 wear. POA/POI is dead on at 25, holding the top edge of the sight in the center of the target.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthernHeat View Post
    I know I needed the .156 10-8 Performance rear sight, but didn't know there was different heights of the ProGlo.
    Ok so the .156 10-8 rear and .220 tall ProGlo work best?
    Yes. I tried the Hack Pro Glo and the 10-8 rear only to find out it was too short.

    10-8 has a list of compatible front heights. .220 Pro Glo is what you need. I have that setup on my G26.

  3. #13
    Member JaredW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Eli View Post
    That's what my 17 and 19 wear. POA/POI is dead on at 25, holding the top edge of the sight in the center of the target.
    I just ordered 3 each of the 10-8 .156 rear (they are back in stock at 10-8 BTW) and the AmeriGlo ProGlo Orange .220 height front. But I forgot that Eli said he uses the top edge of the sight. Which I am guessing means Number 2 from this picture.

    Does anyone know if I cancelled/returned the .220 height and instead ordered the .240 height would that give me a correct POA/POI using the tritium vial instead (or Sight Picture #3) on Gen 4 G17's and G19's?

    I use #2 now with solid black sights, but I think I would prefer #3 with this setup...

  4. #14
    Member 23JAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Arizona
    Thoughts on the I-Dot Pro # GL-201U. Is that rear too wide? Is the 10-8 rear paired with a Pro-Glo front better? Would it be worth switching from Mepros, meaning is it a big improvement?
    212

  5. #15
    I don't follow the dimensions for the 10-8 height of .156". Isn't that too small for a .220? I thought glock 9mms had a .165" front and .256" rear.

  6. #16
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    Quote Originally Posted by noguns View Post
    I don't follow the dimensions for the 10-8 height of .156". Isn't that too small for a .220? I thought glock 9mms had a .165" front and .256" rear.
    .156" is in reference to the notch width, not the height.

  7. #17
    Member 23JAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Arizona
    Just put a set of I-Dot Pros with a U-ish notch on my Gen 4 G19 and they are much better the Mep Tru Dots. I'm going to run those for a while but might switch to an 10-8 rear at some point.

    http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/...psdf929e73.jpg
    212

  8. #18
    Member 23JAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Arizona
    Finally got to put several hundred rounds through the G19 with the I-DOT PROs. I don't have a timer but felt much faster then the Mepros and tracking the front sight was MUCH easier. Im going to run these for a while then maybe try out and 10-8 rear.
    212

  9. #19
    I run the pro glo front and 10-8 rear as well. I'm sure the dimensions are similar on the rears.

  10. #20
    Member 23JAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Arizona
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasage View Post
    I run the pro glo front and 10-8 rear as well. I'm sure the dimensions are similar on the rears.
    Is there enough of a gap on either side of the front sight? I've got the I-Dot Pros right now and that .180 wide rear seems huge to me but I'm worried the .156 wide 10-8 rear might be too thin.
    212

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •